Ball Earth conundrums
- Thread starter GaryA
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I did think about it, and I see the fatal flaw in your reasoning.
The moon orbits around the Earth. That means your line from the Earth to the moon also represents half the motion of the moon if viewed edge-on to its orbital path. As you can see, there will be times when the moon is "alongside" the Earth rather than above (or below) the plane. If these times coincide with the moon being between the sun and Earth, there will be a total eclipse.
By the way, it took all of about a minute of searching and thinking to debunk your so-called "conundrum".
The moon orbits around the Earth. That means your line from the Earth to the moon also represents half the motion of the moon if viewed edge-on to its orbital path. As you can see, there will be times when the moon is "alongside" the Earth rather than above (or below) the plane. If these times coincide with the moon being between the sun and Earth, there will be a total eclipse.
By the way, it took all of about a minute of searching and thinking to debunk your so-called "conundrum".
It's ironic that you said, "Both of you guys are "full of it", while you believe in a flat earth. Anyways...
Gary, you can't assume what people believe, that's why I asked the question. I would say, the earth traveling through space at 67,000 mph is science fiction, and people who believe that are brain washed, or programmed. That's my bold statement.
Gary, you can't assume what people believe, that's why I asked the question. I would say, the earth traveling through space at 67,000 mph is science fiction, and people who believe that are brain washed, or programmed. That's my bold statement.
No knee jerking involved - your assumption and judgment about me was made in/with severe error - it is not true. And, while you may have read what I wrote, you did not respond to what I wrote - in the context of what I wrote. Instead, you "invented" your own separate context apart from mine and proceeded to propound possibilities that were totally outside of the context from which my question was put forth.
-
1
- Show all
Sure I can - if-and-when I use a term-of-reference which defines what people believe in the context of the use of that term-of-reference.
It is a FACT that - if someone says they believe the Ball Earth model is correct and true - they are indeed declaring as correct and true all of what is put forth by the Ball Earth model.
It is a FACT that - if someone says they believe the Ball Earth model is correct and true - they are indeed declaring as correct and true all of what is put forth by the Ball Earth model.
Why should I bother? You won't even admit it when you have been soundly debunked. You explained the alleged conundrum. You stated that the moon orbits at a 5 degree angle to the ecliptic. I have no need to support claims that I have not made; I'm merely working with the claims you made.
Get some integrity, Gary.
Get some integrity, Gary.
-
1
- Show all
Here is the original post that started this:
and your response:
and my comment to you on your post:
There is no "severe error" on my part. My comment makes perfect sense in context. When you put another X on this post, you will only demonstrate that you are unable to consider anything outside your preconceived biases.
and your response:
and my comment to you on your post:
There is no "severe error" on my part. My comment makes perfect sense in context. When you put another X on this post, you will only demonstrate that you are unable to consider anything outside your preconceived biases.
-
1
- Show all
You made the claim, you are responsible to provide the evidence. 
And, unless there is a counter-claim - proven to be true by the one making the counter-claim - it stands as stated.
-
1
- Show all
For the record, I have never ever given an X on anyone's post, ever. So, chill brother!
Dino, I think you played dodge ball to the question, but that's just my perspective. I hope we can both agree that it's hilarious, that people believe the earth is traveling 60,000 miles per hour over the speed limit. I mean a police officer should give the earth a ticket. It's going to fast.
Dino, I think you played dodge ball to the question, but that's just my perspective. I hope we can both agree that it's hilarious, that people believe the earth is traveling 60,000 miles per hour over the speed limit. I mean a police officer should give the earth a ticket. It's going to fast.
-
1
- Show all
And, I did.
And, unless there is a counter-claim - proven to be true by the one making the counter-claim - it stands as stated.
And, unless there is a counter-claim - proven to be true by the one making the counter-claim - it stands as stated.
Apparently, my research was lacking on this particular issue back when I first considered it.
I just now went looking for - and discovered - the thing I was referring to - that I did not realize before.
Therefore, I retract that particular assumption included in my illustration - and, will reconsider this particular issue once more...
I just now went looking for - and discovered - the thing I was referring to - that I did not realize before.
Therefore, I retract that particular assumption included in my illustration - and, will reconsider this particular issue once more...
-
1
- Show all